Protest garnered large turnout at Glacier-Howser hydro project meeting
June 27, 2009 by Bram Rossman
Filed under BC government, Business, Columbia Valley, Energy, Environment, Freedom, Headlines, Invermere, Local news
A group of approximately 60 people marched through downtown Invermere to show their displeasure with the proposed hydro project. (Click to enlarge -- photo by Bram Rossman)
They gathered with signs, adorned themselves with costumes and marched loudly through downtown Invermere chanting phrases like “No dam way!” and “Axor go away!” It was a visible and very vocal message from a community whose once-apathetic nature is clearly being shed.
The cause of yesterday’s (June 25) public display of displeasure is a proposed independent power project slated for construction on the west side of the Purcell Mountains.
Project proponents, Montreal-based Axor Group Inc. (operating under the name Purcell Green Power Inc.), and representatives from the BC Environmental Assessment Office (EAO), held a joint open house meeting at the Invermere Community Hall as part of the application review stage of the environmental assessment process. The Invermere meeting was the last of three held throughout the Kootenays during the final public comment opportunity of the assessment process. Further written submissions are being accepted until July 27.
While concerns about the extensive proposal are vast, Columbia Valley residents are being energized in opposition to a particular aspect of the project that will see a 92.3 km, 230 kV power transmission line strung over the mountains and connected to a substation 6 km west of Invermere.
Based on two West Kootenay creeks — Glacier Creek and Howser Creek, along with two tributaries Suck Creek and Burnam Creek— Axor is proposing to divert water flow into 16 km of large tunnels, known as Penstocks, that will be bored into the mountainside. The tunnels will lead from upper elevations of the creek down to a hydroelectric generating station adjacent to the Duncan Reservoir. After power is generated there, a transmission line will carry energy back up the Howser Creek drainage, over the Purcell Mountains, down the Horsethief Creek drainage and connect to BC Hydro substation facilities off Toby Creek Road.
The meeting was opened by Garry Alexander, EAO Project Assessment Director, who explained the provincial environmental assessment process. He also introduced Steve Samis, a representative of the federal government, who explained that the project proposal meets enough specific criteria that it also requires an approval through the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. After introductions of the Axor team, project representative Simon Gourdeau gave a presentation about the company’s project plans.
Protesters carried strongly worded signs. (Photo by Bram Rossman)
While the 100+ members of the audience mostly listened politely, save for a few outbursts, the fireworks began in earnest when the floor was opened to audience questions and comments.
While those asking the questions and making comments included local, regional and provincial politicians, statements also came from concerned citizens as young as 14 years old as well as those much more senior. The subjects were also as diverse as the crowd, which also included a fluffy black dog that spent the majority of the meeting sprawled on the floor in front of the government representatives.
Golden resident Trevor Hamre asked what it would take for Axor to “go away.” While another asked the company’s representatives to look inwards to answer whether they were pursuing a “noble and virtuous” cause. Axor’s answers to those questions, supplied by Gourdeau, focused around cost and the fact that he wouldn’t be there if he didn’t think it was a good project.
Other questions revolved around the amount of water the project will divert from the creeks (at times up to 80 per cent) as well as the direction of a $10,000/year local benefit fund that will be up to a local board of directors to spend.
Local resident Morgan Blakely quizzed the Axor representatives about the company’s ownership and their projected revenue from the project. Gordeau explained the company is owned by Montreal resident Yves Dupont and advised that slightly less then a 10 per cent return on their $295 million total investment is expected each year. With some quick math Blakely pointed out that equates to slightly less then $300,000, of which the community is only receiving $10,000.
If the EAO grants Axor an environmental certificate, which is dependent on approval by the minister of environment, Axor will have license to use the creek water for 40 years. However a number of questions were asked about money being set aside for ‘cleaning up’ the project after the water license expires or if the proponents abandoned their plans part way through the construction. EAO point-man Alexander said he wasn’t aware of any post-project bonds and didn’t know who would pay reclamation costs if project construction ceased prematurely.
The meeting lasted until well after its scheduled finish time, however one of the loudest responses was garnered by comments made by Columbia River-Revelstoke MLA Norm Macdonald. The normally soft-spoken elected representative thanked the large audience for attending the event on a night when other significant community events were also taking place in Invermere and Golden that evening. He also thanked the EAO representatives for their time, noting that they’ve been put in a difficult position — given that they bear the brunt of criticism for a decision that will be made by BC Minister of Enviornment Berry Penner, who hasn’t attended any of the meetings.
“Most people believe their comments will not make a difference on the final decision,” Macdonald said. Describing the proposal as “highly offensive” to his constituents, with raucous cheers and applause, he concluded by advising that residents will not accept having projects, they feel are inappropriate for their area, imposed on them.
Copyright © 2009 columbiavalleynews.com
Mild mannered Norm doesn’t get it – again.
Most of the protestors at the EAO public meeting in Invermere seemed to be concerned more about the process in North America as a whole rather than about what the EAO was in Invermere to hear.
Questions on selling electricity to the Americans? Not any where close to what the EAO is tasked with hearing in this venue.
Questions about general attitude of the provincial government and the NDP flip flops on energy? Was not what the EAO were there to listen to.
It’s no wonder that the anti crew feel left out of the very public process. They force them selves out of the system by going on about things that had absolutely nothing to do with purpose of the venue.
What was the purpose of the venue? Read the name of the organizing group please – EAO? – Environmental Assessment ???
Come on folks, get with the 21st century, they were there to address concerns about the environment in relation to the Glacier Howse project. The anti crew railed against the system as a whole. It’s no wonder they are marginalized or appear to be, or feel they are. They force themselves into that situation by ignoring the purpose of the process.
Not California’s attitude, not the Columbia Basin Trust, not the history of the Columbia Treaty itself, not how BC Hydro buys and sells hydro at a profit and keeps our personal hydro rates low.
The Environment folks. Not all these important but ancillary topics. The environment in relation to Glacier Howse. That is why the EAO and the proponent were there, to get public input in relation to this project and the environment. Some people understood that and addressed that topic but were far in the minority. The anti protestors didn’t get it and unfortunately, neither did Norm.
I was there, standing at the back of the hall and listened to the comments and complaints and presentation. A sorry sight indeed. Rousing yes for the protestors — Rah Rah Rah YEH !!!! TEAM!!!!, but totally missed the point and hence an opportunity lost.
Walter, excuse me, but I think it’s *you* who doesn’t get it. Environmental impact is not something that stops at borders, nor does it know anything about bureaucratic categories. If someone’s hot water tank in Santa Barbara is killing a minnow in some remote BC creek… ya know, everything we do on the physical plane has an effect, and you cannot eliminate that effect by classifying life in so many little boxes and pretending all is well just because you have done, or pretended to do, some narrowly focussed environmental impact study. Life does not work that way.
Democracy does not work that way either. It too knows no borders. If governments are working together throughout North America (and the world) — harmonizing, as they say — then what happens in Washington or Los Angeles or London that impacts on local control of resources (and local protection of the environment) is real and matters. That is the way society works. Life does not stop at borders, especially in a modern globalized society.
The naysayers are making a perfectly valid point by thumbing their noses at the pettiness of the bureaucrats and pointing out the bigger picture of things, the context in which the bureaucracy is set.
It is obvious that they certainly do “get it” and they are out to share their insights and perspective with others. You might say they are evangelizing for common sense, for democracy, for protection of the earth. Indeed, I think they *do* get it.
While you may be right that the local MLA is not fully up to speed with all of this, he is certainly listening and learning — which is more than some others can claim.
And BTW, I think it is not a bad idea for the protestors to have hijacked the meeting, because what they are saying in effect is everything that the government *claims* to be doing but is NOT (environmental protection, democracy, etc.). Basically they are saying: “if you, government, won’t do your job (as you claim to be doing), then we will do it for you.” In a democracy that is certainly a right and reasonable thing to do.